UFSO whitewashes whilst accusing Britain of a whitewash.

Regarding this article posted by University For Strategic Optimism which for all intent and purpose is not a University, is not strategic in any shape and shows no effort to promote optimism, instead seemingly being some WordPress.com based (as this site is) cheerleaders of the cuts choir.

I’m also struggling to find any evidence of a Dr. Sofia Himmelblau every existing, with entries on Google only showing the UFSO site itself (UPDATE: and within 15 minutes of posting this article, this site)

This is a screenshot of their site on August 11th at 3:32AM UK Time (Click all images for full size versions)

Here is the image that they used for the article’s header:

And here, care of the wonder @robmanuel, the founder of the website B3ta, on Twitter and posted to Twitpic is the original image:

How convenient for them that the cropping of the image would remove every trace of multiculturalism in the picture. You have to wonder about the intentions and honesty of a group are when the photo they use to highlight their point that the clean up movement after the riots is a mostly white and race led has been digitally altered to remove black people.

Rob Manuel, discoverer of this (as he, or rather the back of his head actually features in the photo being used) has responded via Twitlonger. I’m including his response underneath

This post makes lots of interesting points that I could partially subscribe to but it’s rather let down by the photo. I’ve noticed this because I’m in it. I’m the guy in the middle at the bottom of the frame with red hair.

It’s become a bit of a famous photo but there’s something missing: two black guys who were standing directly behind me.

The photo on your site has been cropped to the pixel pretty much not to include these guys. This is pretty damn odd in post talking about race with a hash tag #riotwhitewash making the accusation that this was a mostly white affair sticking two fingers at the BMEs.

All I can say really is my intention at turning up wasn’t consciously racist and I don’t believe subconsciously, but there’s something actually sort of I don’t know what, not racist exactly, but certainly propagandist about cropping the black guys out of the photo and then writing a post saying it was all too white.

Now I’m sure there’s a defence here. Maybe you were sent the image already cropped, and I’m besmirching your good name without knowing the facts. Maybe you thought it was aesthetically better without these narratively inconvenient people dominating the lower frame, but really what I’ve found fascinating about this whole thing is how this photo gets twisted to fit the political agenda of the writer. (The Daily Mail does the same thing and I’ve been appalled how they’ve used these pictures to fit their tory supporting pro cuts horror show.)

And if you’re interested in the actual moment rather than how the photo has been used for random bits of propaganda – people were doing a broom mexican wave out of bordom because no one was allowed to do any cleaning because the cops still had the street blocked.

Anyway too many words. I’ve made a pic to make it clear of the bit that’s missing from the photo. Sorry if I appear stroppy but this has irked me. http://twitpic.com/645wg2/full

Advertisements

When censorship bites the hand that supports it

Mind boggling… It is shocking that, no matter how bad a song it is, Money For Nothing is being banned from Candian airwaves for using an offensive word.
The word in use is fa**ot, but the ban ignores the context in which it is used, which is actually hyper-critical of the character that is singing the song. May as well burn copies of Tom Sawyer, Huck Finn and To Kill A Mockingbird because they use the N word, regardless of the context in which it is used.

Of course, we already have instances of places in the United States banning Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer because of its use of the N word which has lead to edited versions being released.

What a world we now live in when artistic works that actually support causes of equality are now being removed because of their use of a word that could be offensive if it is used in a certain context. How depressing.

The Daily Mail – Contrary morons

Do you want to know what really gets my back up about the British press? It isn’t their snidey reporting of the lives of celebrities as if its some kind of news worthy event, its the contrary way they can’t decide what side they want to be on from one day to the next, or in the case of the Daily Mail, on the same day, or sometimes even within the same hour.

Take this for example:
9:31 AM – 1st October 2010 – Prince Charles is right. This cruel, witless modern comedy is beyond a joke written by Jan Moir. Yes she who decided that Steven Gateley died of a twisted and cruel disease known as gay of all people. This badly informed article attacks Frankie Boyle and says that we’re all missing Victoria Wood. No my dear, you are. I’m happy with Frankie and his bitterly witty and sharp barbs aimed so high that you can’t even understand the joke.

Then, take this:

10:26AM – 1st October 2010 – Death of the office joke: Britain enacts PC equality law which means ANYONE can sue for ANYTHING that offends them Not even an hour and they’ve changed their fucking tune haven’t they! Now they are holding the moral baton for the right to offend, instead of the right to be not offended.

You know Paul Dacre and your have it every way cronies at the Mail, if you could at least be consistent then you’d make it at least a little bit hard to actually attack your hideous beliefs put into print.

%d bloggers like this: